On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 10:25 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> This can't be right. I guess that would be a good thing for> recipe-sanity to test for in fact.
... except that this wouldn't have helped because oe-core doesn't
currently have recipe_sanity at all. Heh. I'll send a patch for that
later, and then maybe we can add the bogus DEPENDS checking as a future
enhancement.
p.

On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 11:36 -0700, Saul Wold wrote:
> >> +FILES_eglibc-dev_append += "${bindir}/rpcgen ${base_libdir}/*.o ${datadir}/aclocal"> >> +FILES_eglibc-staticdev_append += "${libdir}/*.a ${base_libdir}/*.a"> >> > You need to make sure that libc_nonshared.a goes into -dev rather than> > -staticdev somehow. I didn't immediately spot any mechanism which would> > do this, though I haven't tested the package to find out what happens.> >> >> +FILES_uclibc-staticdev_append = "\> >> + ${libdir}/*_nonshared.a \> >> + ${libdir}/lib*.a \> >> > In similar vein, this doesn't look right.> >> I think I should be able to remove nonshared from a list.
I'm not entirely sure I understand what you said there. Just to be
totally clear, for eglibc and glibc at least (and I imagine uclibc too),
libc_nonshared.a needs to go into the -dev package and not -staticdev.
So I don't think it should ever be appearing in a FILES...staticdev
list.
> > This one is a bit odd: it seems to just be dropping the .a files> > altogether without introducing a -staticdev package for them.> >> I thought that maybe the default rule provided in bitbake.conf should > accomplish this since it is FILES_${PN}-staticdev = "${libdir}/*.a > ${base_libdir}/*.a"
Ah yes, right.
> >> +#FILES_${PN}-dev = " ${includedir}/a52dec/*.h ${libdir}/liba52.so ${libdir}/liba52.la "> >> +#FILES_${PN}-staticdev = " ${libdir}/liba52.a "> >> > This is a bit weird. What's going on here?> >> As above, trying to ensure that the default bitbake.conf rules would work.
Okay, fair enough. But in that case please don't leave the old bits
commented out.
> > All in all I think this patch needs a bit more work. It was quite a big> > diff so I only skimmed it rather than reviewing it thoroughly but I> > don't think it is quite ready to go in yet. Also, can't a lot of this> > be done in bitbake.conf without quite so much recipe patching?> >> Most of it is done there, I was looking at adding a staticdev.bbclass > that would handle the lib${PN} case generically, as a second phase of this.
Can the RDEPENDS_${PN}-staticdev not go in bitbake.conf? That would
avoid all these cut and paste errors that seem to be plaguing that
particular area.
p.

On 06/10/2011 02:36 PM, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 11:36 -0700, Saul Wold wrote:>>>> +FILES_eglibc-dev_append += "${bindir}/rpcgen ${base_libdir}/*.o ${datadir}/aclocal">>>> +FILES_eglibc-staticdev_append += "${libdir}/*.a ${base_libdir}/*.a">>>>>> You need to make sure that libc_nonshared.a goes into -dev rather than>>> -staticdev somehow. I didn't immediately spot any mechanism which would>>> do this, though I haven't tested the package to find out what happens.>>>>>>> +FILES_uclibc-staticdev_append = "\>>>> + ${libdir}/*_nonshared.a \>>>> + ${libdir}/lib*.a \>>>>>> In similar vein, this doesn't look right.>>>>> I think I should be able to remove nonshared from a list.>> I'm not entirely sure I understand what you said there. Just to be> totally clear, for eglibc and glibc at least (and I imagine uclibc too),> libc_nonshared.a needs to go into the -dev package and not -staticdev.> So I don't think it should ever be appearing in a FILES...staticdev> list.>
I understand that, Khem also mentioned it. It a matter of doing some
python RE stuff to drop them from the -staticdev list.
>>> This one is a bit odd: it seems to just be dropping the .a files>>> altogether without introducing a -staticdev package for them.>>>>> I thought that maybe the default rule provided in bitbake.conf should>> accomplish this since it is FILES_${PN}-staticdev = "${libdir}/*.a>> ${base_libdir}/*.a">> Ah yes, right.>>>>> +#FILES_${PN}-dev = " ${includedir}/a52dec/*.h ${libdir}/liba52.so ${libdir}/liba52.la ">>>> +#FILES_${PN}-staticdev = " ${libdir}/liba52.a ">>>>>> This is a bit weird. What's going on here?>>>>> As above, trying to ensure that the default bitbake.conf rules would work.>> Okay, fair enough. But in that case please don't leave the old bits> commented out.>
Right, that was a goof on my part.
>>> All in all I think this patch needs a bit more work. It was quite a big>>> diff so I only skimmed it rather than reviewing it thoroughly but I>>> don't think it is quite ready to go in yet. Also, can't a lot of this>>> be done in bitbake.conf without quite so much recipe patching?>>>>> Most of it is done there, I was looking at adding a staticdev.bbclass>> that would handle the lib${PN} case generically, as a second phase of this.>> Can the RDEPENDS_${PN}-staticdev not go in bitbake.conf? That would> avoid all these cut and paste errors that seem to be plaguing that> particular area.>
Arealy in bitbake.conf, it's the RDEPENDS_lib${PN}-staticdev (note the
'lib' prefix), this is special for a hand full, if I can set up the
inherit than it done that way.
> p.>>>